09/09/1974 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~ . - . --- - --- -- - d_ .. -- --- ~ -- - --.-.->--.- ~ --._- . .,- ....- -... -- , .Councilman williams wondered whether any conflict on his part would be involvea :because of his interest in Citizens Bank. Assistant City Attorney could see no . :problem since the buildings were owned by others. 8/2~/;: e ' d ' t' 'iPHove Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Wood to approve the traff~c ~rec ~o change as recommended. Motion carried unanimously. - -.. .., -~ ... -,-- C. Truck Route Signing - Council was asked t; adopt resolution, copies o-i---;;i-;i-ch -;;?:Z::e---\ ; previously furnished, prohibiting through truck t;,...-.--,-.-fic on portions of 11th, 13th, \ , Kincaid, Washington, and Jefferson. Official designation would make legal enforce-; ment of the truck prohibition possible. Assistant Manager explained the reason \ for not identifying other streets in like manner, such a 6th and 7th, was because I they were State highways and the Council had no jurisdiction. He cautioned that enforr.ement under the proposed designation might not be too successful because it would require police officers' following trucks t~ough an entire route to de- termine whether they were using it as a through route or only to reach a destina- : tion within the' city. Al Williams, traffi c engi leer, explained tha t a . "motor truck" as defined under State law was a vehicle something in excess of 6000 pounds. He said that advisory signing installed by the State was in place on I-l05 with one yet to be installed for southbound traffic approaching the 6th and 7th interchange, one that he felt I I would have significant: impact. The State could not sign I-5 for northbound traffic I through Glenwood onto Franklin, he said, so he felt there was nothing to be gained e ! by pursuing that. A short study of truck traffic on 7th east of Washington re- l vealed that about 15% of the trucks were using that street as a through !oute. He ~added that the City Attorney's office felt the city could regulate through truck . traffic on that route, so it was hoped something could be worked out. . Traffic Gngineer continued .that the resolution proposed here concerned truck traffic Ion 11th and 13th. He said he didn't expect a great change in the present situ~tion, since only about 1% of the trucks were using 11th and 13th as a through route. How- ever, designating it for "no thrc'lgh motor trucks" w'uld prevent the possibili ty of its becoming used as a ~~rough route. He noted that the advisory signing on I-l05 appeared effective ror traffic from the west, but movement off I-105 onto .6th and 7th would involve major enforcement and public .relations problem~. He 1 added tf'3t all major trucking associations were notified of the proposal for 11th ;a~d 13th with no contact, either positive or negative, and staff had no reason to . believe it would not be acceptable to the. trucking industry. In answer to Assistant !Manager, Traffic Engineer said the State Highway Department had been contacted ~several times with regard to signing on I-5 to no avail. Coullcilwoman Beal wondered if trucks could /:e stopped' to det~rmine their destina- Ition and to inform them they were not to us" the streets as through routps. She ,also as}~edwhat the penal ty would be for v_iolation if the streets wen: designated e lfor no through traffic. She questioned whether logg~ng trucks would h&ve Dusiness iWithin the city requiring use of streets other than truck routes. Assistant IManager thought stopping trucks to determine their destination would be difficult I to justify if there were only one or two using the city streets under discussion Ii as through routes. . The State b~cause of restrictio~s could. not place addi tion~l I! signing at the I-5 ~nterchange ~nto Glenwood, he sa~d, but ~t was hoped scmeth~ng !could be worked out between the City Attorney's office and the Traffic Engineer i to regulate Franklin. Traff~c Engineer added that there could be problem spots with logging trucks southbound on Jefferson approaching 11th or eastbound on 7th, 'but if that occurred the companies could be contacted. Stan Long, assistnat city attorney, said any citation would more than likely be very modest, in line with I : that for disobeying traffic signs or signals. Corom 8/28/74 Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Wood tc adopt the resolution. ApproVe Motion carried unanimously. .---- " '..-' Pat Stinson, Eugene Sand & Gravel, was in favor of the intent of designating the (1221) truck route, but wondered about the definition of a "through" truck. He was thi:l1l<ing of deliveries and pickups witl1in the city- al1d even service stops for a truck itself. He noted the problem of trucks reaching the South Hills area coming across the River on the Jefferson Street bridge. Manager defined a "through" . . truck as one following an entire route designated for trucks with no apparent need for a stop or stay within any segment of that route. He said a truck coming across the Jefferson Street bridge to reach the South Hills could travel Jefferson, west.., on 6th, -.and south on Garfield rather than traveling 11th west. - -- --.? .~ ~~ ----"---- -'-""'.. .. - - - - ~- -- -' ~ - - 9/16/74 - '6 ....~ . ~ 323